



% 















*^ •^^••.^w» .0* .•111* *o, A«> •il?».*^ 




v'-2i^-.% 



'V'^'^^V^ 
































^-l^ve. 






'^^ 



• •• 












» » # » ' 



"^^^^^ 



"^.^^^ 



^ 



.V 



;'^\v 


















*v<0 






5^ 




•^ '^o*^^ •i 























O. 'a * » • A 







Moimltii of Federalism I 

BEAB, TRY, BECIBE, 



/ ON THE CHARGE OP 



WASHINGTON, 

rhat leading Federalists are to MONARCHY 

DEVOTED. • 



IT is important to the people of the United States, to know whether 
>:he two parties, into which the coiuitry is divided, have any reai (rniVrence 
of pnnciiile; and, if there be any real ditlerence, to know in what that dif- 
ference consists. To say tiiat there is no difTcrence, is to charge the fed- 
eral party with an unjustifiable oi)posi)ioii to government. If no such dif- 
fcTence exists, we cannot rationally account for the opposition of the fed- 
eralists, but from a wish to oust their oj)ponent3, for the purpose of getting 
iuto otBce themselves. 

As we are unwillins: to charge the federal party "witli a course of 
conduct so wauling in honesty and patriotism, we must adopt the other 
conclngion, that there is a real dilTerence of (jrinciple between the two par- 
ties ; and that it is on account of this difference, that the federal party have, 
for sixteen years past, continued so unwearied an opposition to the republi- 
can admiuisirafion. 

it then becomes iaiportant to know what this diSerence is : for with- 
out l^tio wing this, the people cannot know which partj-^ it is their interest 
and their duty to support, it is our intention, honestly and candidly, to 
?tate what we believe to be that ditference, and to give some of the evi- 
dence on whieh our belief rests. 

We believe there is a dilference of opinion on the great and essential 
principles of government. 

Political writers divide governmpiits into three classes; monarchies, 
aristocracies, and democracies, or republics. Monarchies are governments 
in which'the supreme power is vested in one person, lisually called a king. 
Aristocracies are governments in whicli the supreme power is vested in a 
select class of persons, usually calied nobles. Democracies, or Republics, 
are governraenl? in which the siipreme power is vested in the people at 
large, who exercise this power either themselves, or by their representa- 
tives. Of the last kind is the happy government of the United States 
which is now ahiiost the only de-nocracy remaining »n the world. 

It is in relation to these iiiree kinds of government, that we use the 
terras "essential pri'.teiples of government" If one person is an advocate 
of a democracy, and another of an aristocracy, these two persons differ about 
the essential principles of goveritment. That the two parties in J ho Uni- 
ted Stales diiTf^r in these essential principles, we believe cannot be denied. 

One lemotk- however, we wish rgmsmbered. When we speak of tlie 
pr(nc)[iles of tiie federal party, we ask to be underaloood to sj^eak of the 
principles of th'-' imr/crs.of that party. We beUeve that a very Kirge ma 
iority of the middling class of federalists have ^ije sume princijites, on 
most points, asli?eir opponents huve; and lliat.if Ihey were once Cooyfti- 
eed of Ukj real principles ard vv-^-vs of their len^^iug moi?.. they woo1{'." ii''- 






\in 



2 .1^^^ 



stanlly Ibreake them, and leave them to take sheHei- under that lorin of 
government, for which they have so strong an attachment. 

In the first place, it cannot be denied that there are men in the coun- 
try, who prefer a monarchical, oraristocratical form of government to our 
democratical form. We all know that in our revolutionary war, we had 
many tories, who still advocated the cause of monarchy. And we further 
know, that after the close of that war, citizens were found deluded enough 
to still hanker after the trappings of monarchy. General Washington, 
in a iolter to Mr. Jay, dated about 1 785, says — " I am told that even re- 
spectable characters si>eak of a monarchical form of government, without 
horror."* And the pa[>ers of those limes mention that thoughts were ex- 
tensively entertained of introducing monarchy, and sending to England for 
the Bishop of Osnaburg, now the famous Duke of York, the second son of 
George III. to be our King. So far were these ideas carried, that in 1787, 
while the Convention for forming a constitution for the United States were 
sitting at Philadelphia, reports were in circulation that the Convention 
intended framing a monarchy, and making the said Bishop of Osnaburg 
the King. 

These facts show that at a former period, the advocates of monarchy 
in this country were numerous and bold. And can we believe that the 
royal race has become extinct ? We cannot. Weshall always find a set 
of men hungry forr monarchical banquets. These men thijilc, that if a mo- 
narchical government were intro<luced, they should be the favorites of" his 
gracious majesty'* the King ; and of course, wonld enjoy the fat things of 
the land, undisturbed by the fluctuations of popular opinion. Instead of 
now and then obtaining an office worth a thousand dollars a year, they 
would hokl for life, one, two, or three offices, giving them ten, or twenty, 
or fifty, or a hundred thousand dollars a year, after the English fashion. — 
Hence we shall always find these men longing after a monarchical govern- 
ment. Nor can we suppose this class less numerous now, than it was 
tliirty years ago. Indeed we know that such men now exist. The ^vri- 
ter of this knows a very considerable number who plainly express their 
preference of a monarchy. 

And it is easy to show that these advocates of monarchy are almost 
wholly among the leaders of the federal party. Of this we shall adduce 
several proofs. 

1. PRINCIPLES OF HAMILTON. 

Hamilton, the great idol and leader of the federalists, w as avowedly an ad- 
vocate of a different form of government from that with which we are 
blest. For many years it used to be denied, that he ever proposed, in the 
Convention of 1787, any form, either aristocratical or monarchical. But 
at last, we have the fact avowed over his own signature. In a letter to 
Mr. Pickering, dated " New- York, Sept. Iti, 1803," a few months before 
bis death, he makes tlie following reply to Mr. Pickering's enquiries : 

" The highest toned propositions which I made in the Convention were 
for a pnsident, senate, and judges during good behavior; a house of repre- 
gentaiives for three years. Though I would have enlarged the legislative 
power of the general government, yet I never contemplated the abolition 
of the state governments." 

Here we have ]\fr. Hamilton's plan. A president and senate during 
good behavior, we ail know, would be about the same as for life. Only 
change the names to king, and hez:se of iordii, and ^ve have an elective mon- 
archy. Yet this plan Mr. H. thinks would he " purely republican." 

Two reasons which Mr. H. assigns fqf offering this his " republican" plan 

* Kacosay's Life of Washington, p. 219. Marshall, vol. 5. p. 95, 



are — " 1. Thai the political priaciplea of the people would enduie nolhiag 
but a republican government. 2. That in the actual situation of the coun- 
try, it was itself right and proper that the republican theory should have a 
fair and full trial." 

Here Mr. H. admits that he offered his "republican" plan, because the 
people " would endure^'' no other form ; from which the inference is very 
plain, that if he hud thought the people would h&ve endured a more directly 
monarchical form, he should have preferred it. But as he believed they 
would not endure it, he acquiesces in giving the '• republican theory" a 
" trial," to see whether it is worth any thing or not. 

In addition to the preceding acknowledgment of Hamilton liimself, we 
have in the Boston Courier, June 13, 1805, a more particular account of 
his famous proposition. What shows that full credit is due to this state- 
ment is, that it exactly coincides with Hamilton's own statement, as far as 
Hamilton's proceeds, though it was published about seven years before Ham- 
ilton's letter. By this we learn, that the president and senate were to be 
during good behavior — that the mode of determining when they misbehav- 
ed was by impeachment — that these impeachments were to be tried by a 
court composed of "• the chief judge, or the judge of the superior court of 
laws of each state, provided such judge holds his otiice during good behav- 
ior, and have a perm inent salary" — that the national legislature " institute 
eourts in each state, for the determination of ail matters of general con- 
cern" — that the judges of these courts be appointed by the piesident and 
senate — that the governors of all the states be appointed by the president 
and senate, with an unquali6ed negative on all laws— that the president 
have an unqaalined negative on all laws of the congress — that tlie presi- 
dent appoint the heads of the treasury, foreign and war departments— that 
the senate have the sole power of declaring war — and that the general gov- 
ernment have the " sole and exclusive' control of the whole militia, and the 
a])pointment and commissioning of all the officers. 

By this we have a full-length portrait of Hamilton's anti-republican 
plan of government. It shows us that bis president and senate would be 
virtually for life, since they could not be removed but by judges appointed 
by themselves, and like themselves, holding tlieir offices during good be- 
havior. Besides, this senate for life were to have tJie sole pcwer of declaring 
war ! And the governors of ail the states were to be appointed by this presf- 
dent and senate ; consequently would be paid by the general government, 
and therefore would be mere creatures of its will. And yet these passive 
governors were to have an absolute negative on all laws of the state iegis 
latures. 

Such were the principles of Alexander Hamilton, the great leader of 
the federalists. We well recollect what were their lamentations at his de- 
cease. They felt that they had lost their most devoted champion. We 
do not wish to impeach the motives of G en. Hamilton. He 7night sincerely 
and honestly think, that a raonarchical or aristocratical government would 
be the happiest for his country. But his country has reason to thank 
Heaven, that his plan of government was not adopted, in the place of our 
democratic plan. 

2. FRENCH REVOLUTION. 

Another proof that the leading federalists are unfriendly to our demo. 
«ratic form of government, is drawn from their hostility to the French Rev- 
otution. 

The situation of France, before the Revolution, was wretched in the 
extreme. Ihe nation was divided into three orrlers, or classes— 1. The 
c-ergy, who were about 130,000—2. The nobiliir. abn,.t ^oo.ooo.-,^ The 



r^st of the nation, tlie great mass of the people, about 24 millions. The 
condilion of the //aV</ order was truly deplorahle ; while the clergy ami no- 
bility, witli the royal family and courtiere, were rioliiig in every extrava- 
gance of luxury and debauchery. The estates of the clergy alone were 
estimated at eight hundred millions of dollars. Th«?ir annual income, be- 
sides their tithel , was estimated at twenty millions of dollars. Some of the 
uohles wallowed in most excessive wealtli. The Duke of Orleans had an 
income of nearly a million and a half of dollars a year, a sum more than 
four times the annual pay of our 221 members of congresa, even taking it 
at $ 1500 a year. The Prince of Conde's income was nearly a million of 
dollars a year. .n i ■, 

While the nobility and clergy were thus drowned in wealtJi and its 
concomitant excess, they paid scarcely any of the public taxes; the thml 
order, in the language of our authority, " bore the whole burdens ot the 
stale ; they alone were liable to taxation." It was this miserable order 
which supported the enormous standing army, which in peace was 200,000. 
and. in war twice that number; and further supported the navy, the [.ubiic 
roads, and all the public works. The tax-gatherers used " the cruellest 
oppression" in collecting the taxes. Their judges were openly bribed, 
shamelessly selling their decisions to the highest bidder : and it they ever 
decided against the noldes, the minister usucdly revoi<ed the sf ntcnce. 

The' horrid lettrcs dc cachet filled the cup of their misery. By these 
tyrannical mandates, persons on bare suspicion were suddenly and arbitra- 
rily arrested, and executed, or thrown into the dungeons of the Basliie, be- 
yond the reach of all their friends. Eighty thousand spies, clerks, &c^ 
were employed by the tax-gatherers, as the instruments ot cold-hearted 
tyranny. In tine, " in France no man was safe." The third order " were 
depressed and miserable in the extreme." And what added a sling to this 
wreichedness, this whole vast machinery of cruelty, oppression, hypocrisy, 
and misery, was often set m motion and coutrouled by the caprice ot a 
prostitute mistress of the French tyrant ! , » n i^ 

For the truth of this faint outline, we refer the reader to tl^.c t.u- 
cyclopedia Britauni^a, (article Revolution,) a work warmly opposed lo 
the French Revolution, which therefore would not exaggerate the evi.s ot 
the old monarchy. If any further evidence is needed, it may be lound m 
R..bison's Proofs of a Conspiracy, p. 29 and 48, a work written expressly to 
cast odium on republican France. 

Such was t'.ie situation of France. But the glorious light of our rev^ 
olntionllashedacrosslhe Atlantic, and m;>.de the darkness oi French «y- 
rannv visible. The French peo!.'« resolved to be free, and accorfiingly 
changed their monarchy to a republic. This change alarmed the kings 
and monarchists of the other portions of Europe, who feared the same spint 
of liberty would i>ut an end to their oppressions. Accordingly Lngland, 
Auslri., Russia, Prus.^ia, Holland, Spain, Portugal, Naples, feardinia, the 
Pone, &e. &c. combined together to restore vile monarchy to t ranee. 

How has this glorious struggle of the French been viewed by the lead- 
ing federalists ? Just as we should expect from the votaries ol nwnarciiy. 
They chimed very harmoniously with ihecorrupt monarchists of Englano; 
and volumes of invective have been heaped on French democracy, trencli 
republicanism, French principles, and French philosophy. Any thing 
French was bad, because the French were fighting against torcign tyrants, 
who thirsted to enslave them. In the language of Mr. Ohs, (kussian t es- 
tival March 25, 1813%) the French had •' subverted the ancient establish- 
ments of raridar government;" and were tlierefore doomed to the execra- 
tion of all the lovers of all such government. 

* Weekly Messengfr, April 2, IBlti. 



But what was the opinion of the revered WAS!n,vGTCN/ We liave ft 
m his reply to the address of the French Minister Adct, Jan. 1798. 

" To call your nation brave, (says he) were to prononuce but common 
praise. Wonderful people! ages to come v. ill read with astonishment the 
history of your brilliant exploits." " I rejoice that liberty, which you have- 
so long eml»rac9tl wilh enthusiasm; liberty, of -whieh you have been the in- 
vincible defenders, nov/ finds an a?y!um in the bosom of a regularly organ- 
ized government; a government, which, beiup; formed to secure the hajipi- 
ness of the French people, corresponds with the ardent wishes of viy hearty 
V liile it gratifies the pride of every citizen of the United States by its re- 
snnblance to their own. On these glorious events, accept, sir, my sincere 
congratulations. In delivering to jou tiiese sentiments, I express not my 
own feelings only, but those of my foUow-citizens, in relation to the conv- 
jtnencement, the progress, and the issue of the French Revolution,"* 

Here Washington distinctly avowed that the French democratic 
government, " corresponded ^vith the ardent wishes of his heart," and that 
it was one resembling our own. Here remark, also, how different h the 
Iriuguage of Washington from that of federalists. Washington calis the 
French democratic government " regularly organized." Mr. Oiis calls the' 
viespoiic raonnrciiies of Euro[te, which the French destroyed, " regular gov- 
ernments." Hov.- often do we hear the Federalists, like Wushington, call 
th« former French Repubiic,a '' regularly organized governmejit ?" j^ever. 
It is meekl}' caUed a jaccbinical, (lis<rrganiziui>;,factiouH,cdheislical anarchy. 
F'isher Ames, not content with this, calls it downright Hell. " Behold 
France, (s;iys he) thed open Hell, still rins;ing with aisonies and blaaphcmicSt 
ilill smoking with su^lriyir^s and crimes /"f 

Can these men be the disciples of Washington ? 

But what say these men now, siuce the " legitimate^ tyrant Louis is 
restored? Do we still hear them throwing tlitir venom on every thing 
French ? No. This den of atheists and anarchists have been instantane- 
ously transformed, by the migic of a million of foreign bayonets, into the 
■■' loyal sulijects" of " lawful princes." " France reposes in the arms of 
her legitimate prince. We may now express our attachment to her, con- 
sistently with the respect we owe to onrsclves.'"1^ 

What is the reason of this change? Forsooth, " the Bourbons are re- 
stored." The miserable remnants of the old monarchy, the " ancient and 
venerable institutions," that formerly cursed the country, and made France 
one wide scene of " legitimate" wretchedness and poverty — this corrupt 
system is again restored, and the leaders of the federal party most heartily 
•• rejoice." Festivals were held in different parts of the United States, to 
commemorate the glorious triumph of "legitimate" despotism: and the aw- 
ful throne of Heavkn was mocked with the hypocritical homage oi professed 
republicans rejoicing at the triumph of unequivocal tyranny. 

At one of these festivals, held at the city of New-York, June 29, 1814, 
the Hon. Gouverneier Morris^ pronounced an oration, overflowing with en- 
thusiastic joy at the success of monarchy. We have already quoted a few 
sentences. We subjoin a few others : 

" Ye whose envenomed tongues have slavered out invective on all 
who wear hi^itimate cronns ! Ye who represent sovereigns as wild beasts, 
for whose destruction all means are lawful ! Approach. Behold." "And 
thou, too, democracy, savage and wild. Thou who wouldst bringdown the 
virtuous and wise to thy level of folly and guiit! Thou child of squinting 
envy, and self tormenting spleen ! Thou persecutor of the great and good! 
See, though it blast thine eye-balls, see the objects oX thy deadly hate. See 

* Ramsay's Life, page 277. t Works, p. 97. 

i ?:'c-'s' OratioH, New- York, June 29, 1814. 5 The hlol of Federaliau. 



Imiful prince.'; surrounded hj loi/al suhjccls.'" " See that nation seize Hie 
first moment oi'lVeedom to aOopta constitution like that of England." " The 
rot/al house now reigns. Tlio Bourlwns are restored. Ilejoice France ! 
Spain! Portugal! You arc guvcrneil by your kgitimafe kings. Europe! 
rejoice. The Bourlioti^ are restored. The family of nations is compKUed.'' 

Here we have a continued encomium on monarchy, especially on the 
British constitution. Here, too, \vc gee what monarchists mean by freedom. 
France, says Mr. Morris, " seized the first moment ol' freedom:' What mo- 
ment was that ? It was the moment after the allies entered Paris, while a 
million of foreign bayonet.s were at the breasts of a conquered nation. This 
is monarchical "freedom." When the advocates of monarchy speak of a 
ualion as free, they merely mean that the tyrants of the nation are free. 

It was for this reason that Bonaparte was f50 cxecrattnl by the monar- 
chists of Europe and America—not because he oj)presssd France, for they 
now take great pleasure in its oppression by the usurper J.ouis, and his mas- 
ters the allies ; but because he dictated to and governed the surrouniliug 
kings and princes. This was intolerable. Had he contented himself with 
oppressing France, and left the surrounding tyrants to oppress their subjects 
without molestation, all would have been well : the name of Napoleon 
would have rung with " legifiniate" acclamations : he would have 
been hailed as the savior of France, wl ^ had wreated her from the horrid 
" hell" of democracy and jacobinism, and brought her back to " the ancient 
establishments of regular government." But when he invited his neigh- 
bor tyrants to taste the cup of submission, of which they had been so long 
compelling their own oppressed subjecis to drink, tiiat moment he be- 
came a monster. His sin was unpardonable. 

A festival, similar to that at Nev/ York, was got up at Boston. A 
meeting was held at the King's Chapel, (a partentous name,) in School 
Street, June 15, 1814, at which several Resolutions, moved by Mr. Gore* 
were past " unanimously." We extract the following : 

" Resolved, That the citizens of Massachusetts here assembled," " re- 
joice in the prospect that thirty-five millions of tJieir fellow men, have a 
reasonable expectation of being blest with temperate libcrtz/" &c. " They 
congratulate the vena-able head of the House of Bourbon on his restoration 
from exile, to the throne of his ancestors, to which he is called by the entrea- 
ties of his people, and from which he has been excluded by a series of crimes^ 
at which humanity shudders." — " It is because the recent events in Europe 
have a direct tendency to render liberty secure, to check anarchical propen- 
sities, to restrain," &c. that this assembly hail them as blessings," &c.t 

Here are professed republicans, congratulating a tyrant on his ascend- 
ing a throne, on which he is forced by a million of foreigners, and to which 
he has no more rightful claim than any farmer in America ; and represent- 
ing that it is a " scries of crimes" which has hitherto deprived him of this 
throne. Here too a corrupt monarchy is called " temperate liberty :" of 
course, a republic, having more liberty, must be intemperate. Here too a 
corrupt monarchy is declared to have " a direct tendeHcy to render liberty 
secure.'' We must recollect, however, what has been before stated, that 
monarchists, by " liberty," mean f/i(? Ziicrtj/ of kings. We must therefore 
understand this to mean, that the chango in France will render the liberty 
of kings secure. Here too the Bourbon loonarchy is declared to have " a 
direct tendency" " to check anarchical propensities" — that is, republican 
propensities, such as led to the American and French Revolutions. This 
is what monarchists mean by " anarchical propensities." Hearen be 
thanked, that WASHINGTON, and the other patriots of seveuty-six, 

* Late Governor of iMassaclmsetts — the oracle of FeJ?ta^ifrr.. 
f Centine], June 38, 1814. 



kad so large a share of these " anarchical propensities ;" and that they 
persevered in them, till they established our present " anarchicar govern- 
meatj in opposition to tlipse \vho meditated a monarchy. 

In accordance wilh these sentiments, the federal papers are now telling 
us of the " happiness" of France, under the usurper Louis. A paper now 
before me,* has the hardihood to assert, that France is " perfectly tranquil 
and contented !'''' Perfectly tranquil and contented ! Governed by a con- 
temptible usurper — with 130,000 foreign troops to keep him on the throne, 
and to dictate to him his measures — catholics inhumanly murdering the 
protestants — and the country pressed down with enormous taxes, paying 
the treacherous Allies more than one hundred and thirty millions of dollars 
for their own suhjugaticn, with nearly three millions a year more to pay the 
150,000 tioops for keeping the yoke around their necks, besides having to 
supi>ort this whole immense army for five years with provisions, forage, 
fuel, and light ! All this ocean of base ignominy and wretched slavery — 
and yet *^ perfectly tranqidl and contented T 

How it 13 that a country', which, while a republic, was stigmatized 
with every vile epithet, now, since it is pressed down to the earth by the 
most inhuman treachery and hypocritical baseness, has become a " perfect" 
pattern of tranquillity and contentment— cannot be accounted for on any prin- 
ciple, but that a certain class of persons among us have a strong desire to 
have a monarchical government nearer home. 

We would seriously ask any impartial citizen one question. Suppose 
news should this moment arrive, that France had dethroned the usurper 
Louis, driven out the mercenary hordes of the allies that now basely hold 
France in bondage, and established a free republic, such as they had in 
1790. Do you believe the news would be cause of jo)' to the leading fed- 
eralists ? Would they again, as on the other occasion, illuminate the State 
House at Boston with two thousand four hundred lam[rs, and the skies with 
five hundred rockets, in commemoration of the happy event ? No. No 
such rejoicings would be seen. How then can these men be the real 
friends of a republican government ? 

3. SPANISH AMERICA. 

Another proof that the leading federalists are unfriendly to repuhlican 
principles, is oii'ered by their disregard for the interests of the Spanish 
American republicans. While old Spain was fighting for her miserable 
fool and villain of a king, the federalists were alive to her success. But 
the Spanish Americans, struggling, as we once struggled, to throw off the 
yoke of their oppression, they view with coldness and iaditlerence, if not 
with open dislike. 

4. BRITISH GOVERNMENT. 

Another proof is found in their warm and habitual praises of the Brit- 
ish government. The miseries of Ireland, wretchedly oppressed by the Brit 
ish government, and the slavery of the East Indies, the theatre of the most 
wicked and unheard-of enormities, practised by men calling themselves 
Christians, the federalists can view with jierfect calmness and composure. 
And those unhappy fugitives from Ireland, whom these barbarities have 
driven to this country, they are in the daily habit of vilifying as tlisorgau-- 
izers and rebels, because they could no longer submit to ihe villainous op- 
pressions heaped on their country by the British tyrants. 

But is it only in Ireland and the East Indies, that the British govern- 
ment appears clothed hi its robes of tyranny ? No. At home — in Eng- 

^- Centinel, Feb, IP, 18: -. 



8 

land — enough is fonnd lo disgust any real republican. liOok al i(s tnor 
mou3 expenses. Its present peace establishment consumes thre' hioidnd 
millions of dollars a year ! For several years durinc the war it was nearly 
twice this sum. Hence this enormous sum is torn from the hard earning;* 
of the laboring classes, besides heavy additional sums for poor-rates and 
tithes to their priests. Each of these latter, for England alone, is about 
ihirtr/ millions of dollars ! Thus weighed down with taxes, what is the con- 
dition of the people? Wretched in the extreme. More than one qxtarUr 
of the whole people are pmipers, su|)portcd by the other three quarters ; and 
the number is constantly increasinc;. They are literally starving; to death. 
for want of food. Hence mobs and riots are constantly happening, in all 
pai'ts of the kingdom. 

But what is the situation of tlie royal family, nobility, and office-hold- 
ers ? They are rioting, in the most extravagant excess. There are more 
than twenty persons, each of whose income, from their landed estates only, 
h over two hundred thousand dollars a year ! Some of Ihem are tliree htm- 
dretl thousand, four hundred thousand, and five hundred thousand : one is 
more than^uc hundred andjifiy thousand dollars a year ! Here is one per- 
son, liaving an income from lii?i landed estate alone, of more than half a 
million of dollars a j-ear ; enougii to support two or three thousand of their 
families in comfort and happiness through the whole year, without a single 
hour's labor. 

But the evil ends not here. In addition to these overgrown estates, 
there are several hundred thousand offices, all supported from the hard earn- 
iugs of (he laboring class. Some of these office-incomes are most extrava- 
gant. The salaries of Lord Castlereagh for the year 181.'), were more than 
one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. His contingent expenses while at 
the Congress of Vienna were about one hundred and ninety thousand dol- 
lars. The government have lately expended about two millions of dollars 
in purchasing an estate and building a palace for Lord Wellington : while, 
in addition to this, his annual pay from the treasury is about eighty thou- 
sand dollars. In many cases these oflices are mere sinecures; the bolderS^ 
performing none of the duties whatever, and yet some of them receiving 
(Lord Arden for instance) more than a hundred thousand dollars for thus 
doing nothing! 

We might go on with these details of wanton extravagance and op- 
pression till we had fdled a volume. There is no end to them. And in 
the midst of all this wicked prolWion, three millions of inhabitants are pau- 
pers, and a large portion of the rest scarcely able to live. 

It is this government which we hear constantly eulogised by the lead- 
ing federalists. It is this which they call " temperate liberty," and <' regular 
government 1" Cnn a single person doubt, whether these men are the 
friends of monarchy ? We do not wish to censjure w ithout grounil. Rut 
while 8uch a government, built on the groans and miseries of nearly a hiui- 
dred millions of human beings, h made the theme of perpetual praise, while 
that republic, which Washington d^'dared ^'corresponded wirh the anient 
wishes of hn lu-art," is m:ule the Ihemn of perfsetua! abuse — candor itseil 
must exclaitfl, " These men are surely the friends of monarchy." 

But the friends of re[)ublicanism h.-xve grounds of cheering hope. The 
oppressed people of Kngland have awaked. England is preparing for a great 
revolution. In two years from this time, w** believe the corrupt monarchy 
of England will have fallen, and a more I'rcc government established. Our 
hopes may be blasled by un^ori'^ceu events • but at present such a revohi 
tion seems almost inevitable. 



9 

5. MIRANDA'S EXPEDITION. 

A fuitlicr proof that the leading federalists are friendly to monarchy, 
is furnished by some disclosures made several years siuce, respecting Gen- 
eral Miranda's exerdons to liber;ite South America. In 1797, a pian 
for the co-o;)eration of England and the United States in this object was 
drav/n up by the aeienis of the revolutionlsfs, and presented to the British 
gjovernraenl, and to Mr. Rufus King, then our Minister at London, and the 
fuderal candidate lor President of the United States in 1810. The plan 
apftears ta have been supported and encouraged by Mr. King, 3Ir. Hamil- 
ton, Mr. Pickering and others. The fourth article of this plan has the 
fullowi.'ig broad avowal : 

" A d'Jhisive alliance between England, the United States, and South 
America, is so much required by the nature of things, the geographical situ- 
alion of each of the three countries, the productions, industry, wants, man- 
ners, and disposiiion of tlie three nations, that it is impossible this alliance 
shoiihl not last a long time; especially ij' care betaken to strengthen it bi; 

SIMILARITY IN TH/' TOLITICAL FORMS OF THE THRi:E GOVERNMENTS; 

that iii to saj'-, by the enjoyment oi civil liberty properly understood. It 
might even be said wilh confidence, that this is the only hope remaining to 
libertr, audaciously outraged by the detestable principles avowed by the French 
republic.'^ 

Here we have the distinct avowal of a plan to make the government 
of the United States, and that of the intended South-Amciican nation, sim- 
ilar to the Btilish government, as the only refuge from *' the detestable 
principles" of the French republic — those principles which Washington 
declared "corresponded wiih the ardent wishes of his heart." The tiirce 
nations were to have "liberty properly understood." Whenever we see 
the word " liberty" shackled v/ith such words as " properly understood," 
we may be almost sure that such liberty is meant as is enjoyed in England, 
the liberty of kings and nobles, but the slavery of the people. 

In a letter however from Miranda, enclosed to Mr. Pickering, and di- 
rected to President Adams, we are told what this "liberty properly under- 
stood" is. 

" The form of the government projected, is mixed ; with a hereditary 
Chief of the executive power, under the name of Ynca [the names of the 
Jiingsof Peru;*] and what I like still better, taken in the same family ; a 
Senate, composed oVnchle families, but not hereditary ; and a house of Com- 
mons, elected among all the other citizens who shall jjossess a co7]tprta:t 
property."^ TJiis, he adds, " will no doubt prevent the fatal consequences 
oi the French republican system, vihich 3'iontesquieu calls extreme liberty." 

Such is English " liberty properly understood." The alwve, ex- 
flepting merely the want of the hereditary feature in the nobility, is pre- 
cisely after the model of the British government. President Adams would 
have nothing to do with sucli " liberty." But it was evidently approved 
by King, Hamilton, Pickering, and othere. Miranda, in a letter to Presi- 
dent A(lams, says: " Mk. King, your worthy ambassador," &c. ^'- enterirg 
into all ilic ditaih^ will communicate to you the inform.atian," &c. Mr. Kirtg 
himself, in a letter to Mr. Pickering, dated Feb. 2S, 1798, says: " The 
President may therefore expect the overture of England, and will, I am 
persuaded, act upon if, under the soiluence of that wise and cC'iUjirehensive 
policy, whicli, looking ibrward to the destinies of the new worh!, shall in the 
beginning, by great and gencroiis deeds, lay deep and firm the foundations 
of lasting concord between iis rising Empires." He further saya, be has 

* " The empire (of Peru) \vas gov';nip(l bv a race of kinss. or incas," M?- 

■r^i's Univcrsul JIist.>vy, vn!, '24, p. T53. 



10 

^' found out and apquiretJ the confalenceof certain Jesuits, natives of South- 
America." *"• I have often convtrsed with them, and seen the reports 
which they have prepared for their employers." And the manuscript pam- 
phlet, from which we have derived much of the ahove information, and 
which contains the above article on the similarity of the three governments, 
was, with other manuscripts, left l^y the auilior in the hands of Mr. Kins, 
under whose inspection consequently it passed before publication. 

We regret Ave are not permitted to have the whole of their private cor- 
respondence on the subject. It would unqut'stionably develope more fully 
the views of IMessrs. King & Co. or. the subject. Of Miranda's letters to 
Hamilton, we tind only a single extract pu!)libhed. !n that Miranda say? : 
"With what pleasure have I heard, my mosl dear General, of your appoint- 
ment in the continental army of the United States of America. Our wish- 
es, it appears, are going to be at hist accomplished." " Tiie only danger I 
foresee is the introduction of the French [jrinciples," &c. 

The design was, that the United States sliould furnish ten thousand 
troops for the war. Here of course was a rich field for IJamilton's military 
ambition. And hence we can conceive wii}' he and his friends were so 
displeased with President x\dajis, for making peace with France, and dis- 
banding the armj, especially as, Avithout this army, our form of government 
could not easily be changed to that of the Brilish goven^raent. 

From the above extracts, we have good evidence, that Ivingct' Co. aji- 
proved of the proposed cliange in our government. It seems Mr. iCing 
was intimately acquainted with the Spanish agents who drew uj) the plan; 
that he " olten conversed" with them ; that he " entered into all the details ;" 
an<l that he impliedly recommended it to the adoption of President Ad- 
ams, as " wise and comprehensive policy." Tlie fourth article of the plan 
recommends an alliance, and advises to " strenglben it by similarity in the 
political forms of the three governments." Accordingly Mr. King recom- 
mends to President Adams to "lay deep and jinn the foundations of lasting 
concord." There seems to be a great harinony of opinion. 

If Messrs. King & Co. had approved of the j)Iau generally, but not of 
the change of our government, why did they not have that article blotted 
out of the plan ? But suppose they had not power to do tliis, (though we 
must believe they hafl.) why did they not at least protest against that part 
of the plan? Why did they not leave on record some expression of their 
disapprobation ? When Mr. King sent a letter of introduction to Mr. Pick- 
ering by Caro, Miranda's agent, why dul he not say — "I am well pleased 
with the general plan ; except the proposed change in our own government. 
To this Vie can never agree. Our excellent democratic form of govern- 
ment so far suriwsses the corrupt Britisli monarchy, that we can never think 
one moment of exchanging it for the latter." 

Why was not some such protest as this entered ? But no such pro- 
test is found. Not a word escapes, disapproving of this monarchia! article. 
Mr. King, it seems, " entered (according to the testimony of Miranda him- 
self) into all the details" of the plan, and still found no fault with a sijogU 
article.* 

6. PrUNCIPLES OF A.MES. 

FisiTF.ii AftiF.b' writings furnisli another proof of our position. Mr. 
Ames, afler (he death of Mr. Hamilton, was tlie grand leader of the fedenii 
party. The following are extracts from his works. 

" The inunortal spirit of the wood-nymph liberty, dwells only in the 
Brilish Gu/c" 

* For (he (loonmeiits on this .-ubiect. see .FdiT)b'ir!>li Rfvirvr. nf Ipor; or 1809, and 
T.G'Ax>n Patriot, Maj, IblO, ■ " ' 



11 

" Our couutry is too big for union, too sordid for patriotism, too danc- 
cratic for liberty" [i. e. " liberty properly uiitlerstood" — " temperate libeily," 
or the liberty of km^s.] 

Speaking of white birch stakes, he says — " It is the nature of these to 
ftiil iii two years ; and a republic wean; out its morals almost as soon as 
the sap of awhile birch rots the wood." 

" There is a kind o'i fatality in the affairs of Rcpiihlics, that eludes the 
foresight of the wise, as much as it fniatratcs the toils cuiil sacrifices of the 
patriot and hero." 

" Is there in human affairs an occasion of prof.igacrj, more shameless, 
or more contagious titan a cenkuai. election ? Every ispring gives birtii 
and gives \Aings to this epidemic wtschief." 

" Federalism [i. e. our Federal Re[)ublic] was, therefore, manifestly 
founded on a mistake, on the supposed existence of sutlicicnt political vir- 
tue, and on the permanency and authorily of the public morals." 

Speaking of dcmocreic}).^ he says — '' It is an lUumimited IJcll, that in the 
midst oi remorse, horror euul toriure, rings with festivity; for experience 
shows, tiiat one joy remains to //(/.>• s.'io.vi ntaiignant description of Ike damn- 
ed, the power to make others wretched." 

Speaking ol Greed Britain — " There is much, therefore, there is every 
thing in thcU island to blend itself witli love of country." " How different 
are these sentiments from the immoveable aijatiiy of those citizens [of the 
U. S.] who tiiink a constitution [ours] nobtiter than any other piece oj paper, 
NOR so GOOD as a bleink on which a .more PKtiFKCT one could he written.'' 
And after 'Sjjeaking of " the perfection, if any thing human is perfect, of 
their administration [the British] of Justice," he says, " let every citizen 
who is able to think, and who can bear the pains of thinking, make tuk 
CONTRAST at his leisure." 

Here the British jurisprudence is called " perfection ;" and ours is rep- 
resented as making a wretched " contrast" w iih it. Our constitution is rep- 
resented as, in the opinion of many, "■ no better than any other piece of par 
per, nor so good as a blank, on which a mere perfect one could be written." 
England is represented as abounding in patriotism, whilst we are " too sor- 
did" for it. Democracy is " a hell" — the morals of a repidilic are as sliort 
ia duration as " white birch" stakes — our federal government is " founded 
on a mistake" — anil Oisr annual cJcclicns are an "• epidemic mischief ^^ the 
source of profligacy the most shameless and most contagious. 

Such are some of the sentiments of I'.ir. Ames, the leader of the feder- 
alists. The present leaders cannot deny that these are in accordance with 
their own. Not only was he their prime leader, but the very writings, from 
which the above are extracts, were examined, collected, and published, by 
themselves, soon after the death of Mr. Ames. 

7. FEDERAL PAPERS, 

To the preceding proofs, we may atUl, the general language of the 
federal pafjers. 

One practice of these papers is, to censure the republicans for what 
f^iey c-dW Jlattcring the people. Those who wish the people should possesB 
no power, would also wish them to forget that they have any. To call on 
the people as the sovereigns of therqmblic, is to keep them awake against 
the machinations of those who would divest them of their sovereignty.— 
This, therefore, the leading federalists dislike. They cannot forgive the 
republicans for acting as sentinels to the people. 

Another practice is, to take systematic and unweaiied pains to render 
our democratic form of govenmient unpopular. Hence the endless snecra 
at the words democracy and democrat, Many of the extracts already given. 



1@ 

are full of this cant. And we might continue our extracts till they would 
fill a volume ; for almost every day adds an item to the list. For a speci- 
men, take the Boston Gazette, April 4, 1816, giving an account of the 
" Grand Federal Caucus," on " Sundai/ evening,'' March 31, liilG, previous 
to the las! election of governor. 

At this Sunday evenitig grand federal caucus, "thk arch fiemd de- 
mocracy," says the Gazette, " received the heaviest denunciations that 
coold he prononuced agaiust him." One "drew with the coloring of a 
master, the loathsome picture of Democracy." Others spoke of "the shack- 
les of Democracy" — "the crimes of Dsmocracy"- — " the beggars of Democ- 
rary" — " the Pharaohs of Democracy" — " the foolscap of Democracy." 
Col. S. reproaches the republicans for " professing the most profound re- 
spect for THE COMMON herd" of the |)eople ; and calUi the federalists " ari.S' 
iocraU,^' for being opposed to ' selecting for otl^ce the vij.ekt of the vile.* 

But the most plain-hearted avowal of Col. S. as given in the Gazette, 
is "Where bespeaks of the " malignarit jealousy on the part of the national 
government towards our militia, which was never equalled, even by the 
trxtvipeted tyranny of Britain, previous to our lxchanging her shackleis 

FOR THOSE OF DEMOCRACY." 

On this we ask leave to make two remarks. 1. Here tyranny of En- 
gland, which produced our revolution, is attempted to be palliated b}' the 
\\ord " trumpeted." 2. We are here told, that when we shook off the 
shackles ofBritaiu in 17 76, we assumed the shackles of democracy. Our 
independence then, was only an exchange of shackles ! And the shackles 
we assumed, were those of the " arch-fiend Democracy" — " the foolscai) 
Democracy" — the " hell" Democracy ! ^ 

Illustrious Washington ! It is thus that thj'- professed disciples ca- 
himuiate thy patriotic achievements. It was thy swoixl, which, under 
Heaven, enabled the patriots of '76, to " exchange the shackles of Britain 
for those of Democracy ." and this Democracy was thy legacy and thy 
boast. Yet thy pretended votaries thus blus[)heme it with the name of 
^'hclir 

The above is only one specimen of the %bors of federalists to render 
the word danocracy unpopular. Examples are endless ; but our limits for- 
bid further instances. 

Some years since, several papers, entitled " The Hindu Philoscphcry* 
were published in the " Commercial Advertiser," a New-York federal pa- 
per, from which the following are extracts : 

"In this country, the Sultan [i. e. the President] is the servant of the 
P'^oplc'''' — he" descends from his precarious throne, whenever his iOvercignSf 
thr people, sea fit to direct. I am told that the state of things which 1 have 
descri;»ed, is imputeil, in part, to the influence of the new jihilosophy. it 
is the spirit of this philo30[ihy to reduce all things to one common level ; to 
pull down the gods from their thrones, and to trample the kings of the earth 
in Ibe dust." 

Speaking of Barlow's " Conspiracy of Kings," the writer says he 
<' bursts forth into enthusiastic aspirations after visionary liberty, and ex- 
pires in philosophical raptures of universal benevolence, and mad execrations 

Wj?07l CROWNED HEADS." 

He represents himself as meeting one day with what he calls a " mod- 
ern philosopher," that is, a republican, wl;o tells him — " Thrones, (says 
he) are tottering; kings tremble at the progress of liberty; noldes and 
priests are conspiring, but in vain, to prop the altar and tlic throne," «5L"c. 

To this the federal writer replies — " Mr, Philosopher," rejoined I, 
" your invectives ogainst kings and nobles are unfoindej). Have crimes 
been l^ss f,e(iuent ''* ^'^F^'^^'^-' ^^'^^ '^'^ '"^^''^'"'^'"^•^■•^ ^^^ Romf. Alhep;-. 
Carthage, Veiace, *"'*" uioderu Fiiince, «.aswf^r the question " 



13 

Ueve ihe cT^use of ^' kings and tiohlcsy' is eKpressly advocated ; and 
tftie superior virtue of a republican government over a mouarcliy openly de- 
nied. 

These sediments were so well relished by the leading federalists at 
Boston, that they had them re-published in the book form, at the office of 
the Boston Gazette, a federal paper. And, to leave no doubt that they ex- 
pressly approved the political sentiments contained in it, they openly avow- 
in their preface, as a reason for re-publishing them, that " the sentiments, 
however, which they inculcate, both moral and political,, are certainly of 
the purest tendena/ ; and are calculated to correct the philosophical reveries 
of the present day.'" 

We give one evidence more from the federal papers. The following 
are extracts from the " Sj.ectalor," a federal paper printed in New- York, 
(See Chronicle, July 19, 1804.) 

Speaking of the early situation of this country and its first settlers, the 
writer says : 

" The moment, I must again observe, was all- important. The fate of un- 
born millious depended on the system of policy they were now about to adopt." 
" Unhappily for their posterity and the world," " their minds seem to have 
been absorbed in tlieir own miseries. All those necessary regulations and 
DISTINCTIONS ?« sociiiij, without niiich no nation can long preserve its inde- 
pendence, were generally neglected, or rejected as encroachments upon their 
individual freedom. The pride of birth was entirely broken dov.n ; and 
the vicious conduct of one or more branches of a family, conferred no dis- 
grace upon the other members. Thus the greatest incentive to domestic 
virtue and mora! obligation, was cut up by thd roots ; and the pernicious 
MAXIM, that fill men are born equal, and cndmvcd with certain unalienable 
rights, &(;. niay be confidently asserted to have had its origin in the estab- 
iishment of this principle." 

'• They therefore married promiscuciisly, withcut regard to m^rn, educa- 
tion, or property ; and brought up their cliildren in such a manner as to be 
most useful to themselves. Accordingly, one was made a carpenter, another 
a hlacksmiih, a third, a taylor, and a fourth, a shee-tnaker, to the utter ex- 
clusion of letters, and a just spirit (/subordination." " Their habits be- 
came democratic. This was sufficient to have opened the eyes of the 
mother country, and called loudly for legislative correctives. Instead of 
this, by means of the hypocritical cant about public virtue and simplicity, 
made use of by some of their governors, the people were edlowed to call tO' 
gtther POPULAR assemblies, and to fortify themselves in the oisGRACEFUii 
steps they had taken. 

" The corner stone of revolution was then laid in all the colonies, and 
our separation effected at a much earlier period than it would otherwise 
have been. If the colonists determined, upon their tirst setting out, to ef- 
fect a separation from the parent country, and to nssume a dig nijied rank 
among the nations of the earth, their domestic conduct iu their intercourse 
■with each other was highly blameable and indiscreet. If they determined 
to remain true, and continue their allegiance, it was still more so. I do nol 
wish to be understood as disap[)roving of the American revolution, (for, in 
my o{)inion, it was an event always calculated upon at home) but I despise 
THE MKANs by wMch it wus brought about. I do not hesitate to declare 
them BASK AND UNWORTHY, and I tremble for my country, when 1 consider 
that they must one day prove h^r rnin. 

" This PLEBEIAN principle of cohcsion and admixture throughout 
the body politic, continued in full force till the commencement of the rev- 
olution. Since that event to the adopti(m of the federal constitution, nay, 
eveu to the present day, this mongrel breed has been multiplied in a 
greater or kfcs degree. Even at the ve-fy n?' ment m v.liich I am writics, 



14 

i\ih,rcspcclahhtra(l(y':m and farmers arc apprcn(fch)2; their sons to I ai- 
bcrs and Udtors^ and .snmcjtccujjniions of a still lower class. 

"From tliJB statement of tacts, the inlel!i^;ent fort>ig;ner will readily 
perceive that ia this country, it is no disgrace to have exercised a me- 
chanic vi. rnoKESsioN, as many persons of this cast have ris-n to the high- 
est places in government. Indeed if lie looks into the private history of 
most of onr ' grave and reverend seniors,' hq will find tlicrn the TiKCiTi- 
MATE LORDS OF TTiE wo'iK-r iiiNcii, Of of the coRN'-FiELD, and miich !»etter 
calculated to move in that sphere than to art where they are. I do not 
mention this as any reproach upon thpm, hut merely to ahow the erroneous 
conduct of those fvho have s^oae hrfcrc ?^s." 

Conunent on this hare-facnl specimen oT the attaeliment of the lead- 
ing federalists to a monarchical government, seems ahriosl needless. Whea 
that Sckcred principle oi' the Declaration of American independence, of the 
constitutton of Massachusetts, and of eternal right, that " all men are bom 
ecjual," is 0[)8niy and uriblusliinijiy denominated a " peiink;;0! s maxim" — ■ 
when aristocratic " distinctionsj in society" are represented as '• uecessa' 
ry" to a nation"'s " independence;" and a republic*, because without these 
distinctions, is represented as " CJttins up i>y the roots" tiie " greatest in- 
centive"" to virtue — when marriages are censured, because contracted with- 
out reganl to " the pride of birth,'' and their offspring are called a " mon- 
grel breed'* — when the respectable pursuits of a carpenter, a blachsmitii, a 
tailor, and a shoemaker, are attempted to be riiliculed — when liie princi- 
ples of our fatiiers are denounced as " erroneous," which makes it " no dis- 
grace to have exercised a mechanical [»tofessiou," and which occasionally 
raise " the legitimate lords of the ^vouTv•KK^ce^, or of the coua-fieud," " to 
the highest places in the government j" or, in other uords, which allow 
the intelligent farmer and mechanic to be eligible to olTsce — when the " mo- 
ther country" is censured for allowing the colonies '' to call together popu- 
lar Assemblies," and '* to fortify themselves" in their " disgraceful steps'" 
— when a writer more than haif laments, that the colonies <lid not "• reuiaiij 
true" to their " allegiance," or at least tliat they efifected a separation at so 
" early a period;" and insolently prociaiins that he " OEsnscs the means 
by which it was brougiit about," and hesitates not " to declare them base 
and UNWORTii\," (pardon yoilr viperous calunmiator, O ye spirits of Wash- 
ington, and V^'"arken, and Fpanklin, and Montcomerv, and Hancock, 
and Adams, and a host of other woithies, who, in the hands of Heaven, 
ivere " the means" of Oiir independence, and whom this cold-hearted nioji- 
arcliist stigmatizes as " base '.") When such poisonous princip-ies are 
openly and darieigly exposed to broad day-light, what must he our opinion 
of the principles of that party which sanction and give currency to sucU 
doctrines '/ They cannot be the friends of a republican government. They 
must be aristocrats, or luonarclii-sls. 

CONCLUDING RE:MARKS. 

To the preceding proofs we might go on adding proof 
after proof. But enough has heen exhibited to show the 
real sentiments of the leading federalists. It is heyond a 
doubt, that they are hostile to our democratic constitution, 
and that they only want power, to exchange it for a differ- 
ent one. This disposition appears in so many shapes, that 
we cannot doubt its existence. Would so much of it ruu 
over, if tiie cistern were not full ? The writer of this knows 
many of the leading fedei\ali?ts, from their own declarations. 



15 

to be monarcliists. The only reason wlij tliey do not avow 
it as openly and as constantly as they do other sentim^ivtsy 
is, that, as Henry said of the doctrine of a separation of the 
States, they find it an unpopular doctrine to preach openly» 
They know that a large portion of the people would desert 
them, if they sliould do this. When the notorious HarUord 
Convention were discussins; a dissolution of our happy 
Union, tlieir dread of the people made them do it wholly 
with closed doors. The same fear forbids a more full dis- 
closure of their monarchical wishes. But they have dis- 
closed enouE^h, on both points, to prove that they hate our 
republican form of government, and that they attempted a 
dissolution of the Union, contrary to the most solemn dying 
injunctions of Washington, as one of the means of getting 
lid of our present constitution. 

On the other hand, iclint are the prbiciples of the lie- 
imUicuns ? They aiihor a monarchy — they abhor an aris- 
tocracy. They most sacredly reverence our republican con- 
stitution and form of government. They look at the cor- 
rupt government of England, and bless the Almighty that 
we are free from its cruel oppressions. 

The Republicans mourn over the fate of France, They 
rejoiced when, in imitation of this country, she threw off her 
yoke of grievous monarchy, and establislied a republican go- 
vernment, which met " the ardent wishes" of Washington's 
heart. They abhorred the " conspiracy of kings,-' which 
laljored to restore her merciless despotism. And when this 
conspiracy, by keeping France for a long period chained to 
arms in her own defence, led the way to a military monar- 
chy under Napoleon, they mourned that the sun of republic 
canisra, once so brilliant, was so soon eclipsed. But still 
they had one consolation left. They felt assured, that the 
dusky planet, Avhich for a moment obscured the splendid lu- 
minary of freedom, would ere long cease to intercept its ge- 
nial rays ; find that, ultimately, its resistless glories would 
burst from their thraldom, and once more give light and 
happiness to the world. 

And they still hope it. Though ilsls wicked conspira- 
cy of kings has lately tviumplied, and given joy to t!ie friends 
of royalty in Europe and America- — though they have suc- 
ceeded in placing the pampered usurper Louis on his tremu- 
lous, sword-propped throne, and thus for a moment compress 
the half-bursting energies of a brave nation — though the late 
eclipse is thus changed to a sullen^ starless njght, that must 
end in the storms and tempests of political co.ivulsion — yet 
the sua of liberty is not set forever. The day will dawtt. 



Then wo to tlie royal conspirators. A terrible retribution 
will be their lot. 

The llepublicaiis cherish with deep solicitiitic our an- 
mial electious. They cherish the annual appeal to tl.e sov- 
ereignty of the people. Instead of calling this an ^« epidemic 
mischief," they hail it as the catholinon of freedom. Though 
i'>.e people sometimes cit, they never err irrecoverably. A 
ftuae step yesterday, is corrected. In their hands, therefore, 
ti,e Republicans feel that all is safe. Honest, intelligent, 
vigilant, — tlie people are the only basis of legitimate govern- 
meui, the only safe- guard of liberty. 

Such are Republicans. Such are federalists. 

\Vc would therefore call on all honest federalists, who 
are really the friends of our most admirable form of govern- 
ment, to support no longer men who will improve the first 
opportunity to destroy this form. Though, by their disgraceful 
proceedings during the late war, their popularity is reduced so 
low, and they feci the foundation on which they stand to be 
se weak and unsafe, that they dare not at present avow their 
object, and therefore affect to wish for peace, and harmony, 
and conciliation : yet their real object remains the same. 
Only continue them in power till their country is again in dan- 
ger, we shall again find them at their former work. Most 
solemnly do we declare our firm and conscientious belief, tha« 
if they had the power, unmoved by popular opinion, they 
would change our republic to a form resembling the corrup; 
and corrupting system of the British government. 

We entreat you therefore to remember this at your elec- 
tions. However smooth may he their professions, cspeciallji 
in the present hour of their humiliation, their dislike to youi 
republican institutions bids you beware of entrusting to them 
the powers of government. 



(^BEWARE! 

Thougli we wish all honest men may featl the evidence of the 
ROYALTY OF FEDERALISM, 

We wc 1)1(1 nnition jiot not to siifiVr it to fall ilito the han<i?of tlic \voul<l-l'e Birfi 
ops and nc!ii!)li/, wiio would consign it to th*^ Jii'>uis!ti''n or BartHe, rather llinn mkh 
a mass of >i idimx yhoulil <:irculate amonp; that jnui^kwho they have so grosalii mpou 
vpon, by hypocritical prof.ision/; (i otLachmcnt to W ashim-.ton, while ojiposwg lu 
princ-iplcs. 



W1S4 



trinudal ike Yankee qfl!ec....No. T.'. Slale Str.-et...:L'oMn. 







*^6« 



Mi. ■4L* « *55jN\ir^* "^ 



f;e.«"^ 















.^^'>, -.^ 










;- ,•»*'% ^flR- /\ °-^-' **'\ 




-*^^;^-:r;T*;^^^«^ 



^-^^ 







.9>^r. 





,v^. 



-c,tr^ 



mmmi 



' c>^ '^rW*' o 

















> .-.^a^-. *^,^/ ..ij|£(ji^ *,^^^* .. 




















;« jP*^^^ V 




V \.c^ :!! 



n"^ . • • ( 




.t 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 769 134 2 



